India eyes 'Patriot missile'

India could be poised to sign a multi billion dollar arms deal with the United States to purchase patriot missiles. Before Prime Minister Manmohan Singh's meeting with US President Barack Obama, the Indian Army has requested the Americans for a briefing of the Patriot-3 Anti-Missile System.

The briefings are likely early next year after which demonstrations could follow. The Patriot 3 anti-missile system is a guided missile system designed to detect, target and hit incoming missiles. It was initially used in the first gulf war and has subsequently been fine tuned. The C-17 military transport aircraft is used for rapid strategic airlift of troops and cargo. It has the ability to rapidly deploy a combat unit to a potential battle area and sustain it with on-going supplies.

The Patriot missile system has been used extensively in the past in the Gulf war in 1991 as well as in the Iraqi war.

The sytem includes the missiles themselves, the missile launcher, which holds, transports, aims and launches the missiles and a radar antenna to detect incoming missiles.

Meanwhile the Indian Air Force has already informed the Defence Ministry that it wants ten C-17 military transport aircraft. The aircraft was on show during the India-US training exercises in Agra last month.

Well here come the Americans all over again, this is getting ridiculous ;every second week there's a new weapon buy from the U.S i mean doesn't anybody else see a pattern emerging here.
the Americans are coming in with everything they have got
read this from janes the Russians, French and israelis are going to have to be more proactive here.

Subscribe

US trade mission arrives in India
A delegation of Tier 1 and Tier 2 defence and aerospace contractors from the US are completing a trade mission to India this week aimed at securing contracts in a market that the US Department of Commerce's International Trade Administration (ITA) has stated is worth "USD15-20 billion over the next three to five years". A notice on the ITA's website said that the three-day mission, which concludes on 13 November, is intended to "introduce these [US] suppliers to end-users and prospective partners whose needs and capabilities are targeted to each US participant's strengths"

The MIM-104 Patriot is a surface-to-air missile (SAM) system, the primary of its kind used by the United States Army and several allied nations. It is manufactured by the Raytheon Company of the United States. The Patriot System replaced the Nike Hercules system as the U.S. Army's primary High to Medium Air Defense (HIMAD) system, and replaced the MIM-23 Hawk system as the U.S. Army's medium tactical air defense system. In addition to these roles, Patriot has been given the function of the U.S. Army's anti-ballistic missile (ABM) system, which is now Patriot's primary mission.

Patriot uses an advanced aerial interceptor missile and high performance radar systems. Patriot was developed at Redstone Arsenal in Huntsville, Alabama, which had previously developed the Safeguard ABM system and its component Spartan and Sprint missiles. The symbol for Patriot is a drawing of a Revolutionary War-era Minuteman.

Patriot systems have been sold to the Republic of China (Taiwan), Egypt, Germany, Greece, Turkey, Israel, Japan, Kuwait, the Netherlands, Saudi Arabia, United Arab Emirates, and Spain. The Republic of Korea is also in the process of purchasing several second-hand Patriot systems after North Korea test-launched ballistic missiles to the Sea of Japan and proceeded with underground nuclear testing in 2006. During August 2008, the United States and Poland signed a Declaration on Strategic Cooperation, in which they agreed to “the deployment of a U.S. Army Patriot air and missile defense battery in Poland. We intend to begin this cooperation next year (note: 2009) and to expand it with the aim of establishing by 2012 a garrison to support the U.S. Army Patriot battery.”

i think india should buy this system atleast it will enhance our developement own missile defence system.

Click to expand...

our own scientists were saying our own AAD, PAD are way superior and we are not interested in patriot system?
i doubt this. phase 1 of our BMD is to be operational by the end of 2012-13, if i read correctly sometime back.

The PAC-3 upgrade is the most significant upgrade Patriot has received thus far, and is one of the most comprehensive upgrade programs ever undertaken on an American weapon system. Nearly every aspect of the system received a significant upgrade. The PAC-3 upgrade took place in three stages, and units were designated Configuration 1, 2, or 3 based on the stage of upgrade they were in.

The system itself saw another upgrade of its WCC and its software, and the communication setup was given a complete overhaul. Due to this upgrade, PAC-3 operators can now see tracks on the Joint Tactical Information Distribution System (JTIDS), which greatly increases the situational awareness of Patriot crews. The software can now conduct a tailored TBM search, optimizing radar resources for search in a particular sector known to have ballistic missile activity, and can also support a "keepout altitude" to ensure ballistic missiles with chemical warheads or early release submunitions (ERS) are destroyed at a certain altitude. For Configuration 3 units, the Patriot radar was completely redesigned, adding an additional traveling wave tube (TWT) that increased the radar's search, detection, tracking, and discrimination abilities. The PAC-3 radar is capable, among other things, of discriminating whether or not an aircraft is manned and which of multiple reentering ballistic objects are carrying ordnance.

The PAC-3 upgrade carried with it a new missile design, nominally known as MIM-104F[citation needed] and called PAC-3 by the Army. The PAC-3 missile is dedicated almost entirely to the anti-ballistic missile mission. Due to miniaturization, a single canister can hold four PAC-3 missiles (as opposed to one PAC-2 missile per canister). The PAC-3 missile is also more maneuverable than previous variants, due to dozens of tiny rocket motors mounted in the forebody of the missile (called Attitude Control Motors, or ACMs). However, the most significant upgrade to the PAC-3 missile is the addition of a Ka band active radar seeker. This allows the missile to drop its uplink to the system and acquire its target itself in the terminal phase of its intercept, which improves the reaction time of the missile against a fast-moving ballistic missile target. The PAC-3 missile is accurate enough to select, target, and home in on the warhead portion of an inbound ballistic missile. The active radar also gives the warhead a "hit-to-kill" capability that completely eliminates the need for a traditional proximity-fused warhead. This greatly increases the lethality against ballistic missiles of all types.

The PAC-3 upgrade has effectively quintupled the "footprint" that a Patriot unit can defend against ballistic missiles of all types, and has considerably increased the system's lethality and effectiveness against ballistic missiles. It has also increased the scope of ballistic missiles that Patriot can engage, which now includes several intermediate range. However, despite its increases in ballistic missile defense capabilities, the PAC-3 missile is a less capable interceptor of atmospheric aircraft and air-to-surface missiles. It is slower, has a shorter range, and has a smaller explosive warhead compared to older Patriot missiles.

Patriot's PAC-3 interceptor will be the primary interceptor for the new MEADS system, which is scheduled to enter service alongside Patriot in 2012.

Lockheed Martin Missiles and Fire Control is the prime contractor on the PAC-3 Missile Segment upgrade to the Patriot air defense system. The PAC-3 Missile Segment upgrade consists of the PAC-3 missile, a very agile hit-to-kill interceptor, the PAC-3 missile canisters (in four packs), a fire solution computer, and an Enhanced Launcher Electronics System (ELES).

our own scientists were saying our own AAD, PAD are way superior and we are not interested in patriot system?
i doubt this. phase 1 of our BMD is to be operational by the end of 2012-13, if i read correctly sometime back.

Click to expand...

not any anti missile system in the world is full proof anti missile system.there is always a room for developement.so if we acquire this then our scientists will know better in this field.so it will help in AAD and PAD developement.

our own scientists were saying our own AAD, PAD are way superior and we are not interested in patriot system?
i doubt this. phase 1 of our BMD is to be operational by the end of 2012-13, if i read correctly sometime back.

Click to expand...

May be our leaders are expecting war before 2013 (2012-doomsday) and hence trying to get hands on whatever's best out there.

our own scientists were saying our own AAD, PAD are way superior and we are not interested in patriot system?
i doubt this. phase 1 of our BMD is to be operational by the end of 2012-13, if i read correctly sometime back.

Click to expand...

First of all let us learn from our experience. DRDO has never been anle to deliver any programme on time. One of the biggest problems is that DRDO always claims that it has a home made solution for each and every weapon system available in the world. They are simply overloaded and I seriously doubt if they can handle all the projects being developed by them.

With the proliferation of missiles in Pakistan we cannot but be cautious. If the system is needed then it has to be procured. We must remember that the only country which is putting in Billions of Dollars in R&D for Weapon Systems is the US. Russians do not have the moolah to put in. Within 4-5 years we are going to see the gap between Russian/Chinese systems and the US systems growing larger and larger. There is no question in my mind, technologically US has the best systems available. How we procure it, how we integrate it, how we negotiate the pitfalls of dealing with the US, is our headache, we have to deal with it today, not tomorrow.

First of all let us learn from our experience. DRDO has never been anle to deliver any programme on time.

Click to expand...

it is the case everywhere. there is a difference between assumptions and working on the ground.

One of the biggest problems is that DRDO always claims that it has a home made solution for each and every weapon system available in the world.

Click to expand...

they have never claimed that. you are saying it.

They are simply overloaded and I seriously doubt if they can handle all the projects being developed by them.

Click to expand...

well. both AAD and PAD have been tested. all 3 tests were successful.

With the proliferation of missiles in Pakistan we cannot but be cautious. If the system is needed then it has to be procured.

Click to expand...

ofc. but not this if our system is better.

We must remember that the only country which is putting in Billions of Dollars in R&D for Weapon Systems is the US.

Click to expand...

may be. but even they are cutting costs.

Russians do not have the moolah to put in.

Click to expand...

that is why they are going for joint ventures with india.

Within 4-5 years we are going to see the gap between Russian/Chinese systems and the US systems growing larger and larger.

Click to expand...

the gap is not as big as you think it is. both have strengths and weaknesses. on the other hand russia is recovering and US is plummeting.

There is no question in my mind, technologically US has the best systems available. How we procure it, how we integrate it, how we negotiate the pitfalls of dealing with the US, is our headache, we have to deal with it today, not tomorrow.

Click to expand...

even patriot system is not fool proof. if we have our own system which has been proven, why go for it?

Hmm I think India is seeing the future thread from Pakistan and China. this is why he is purchasing advanced weapons from USA and Europe, knowing that they will get the products in timely manners and be well prepared for any circumstances. Russia delays a lot

since when the need of patriot missile arose?? Isn't Indian developing its interceptor missiles which is said to be better than Patriot missiles.

correct me if I am wrong, thanks.

Click to expand...

You dont get a replica of systems used by U.S for its defence. There will be some downgrded versions offered. So I guess what Patriot offered previously might have been downgraded and hence our interceptors were better than those.

Aren't AAD & PAD in the same class of missile defence? I don't see how the acquisition will help Indian scientists as the delivery is likely to take place in a couple of years after conclusion of the deal..by this time the indigenous systems would be operational. The United States does not impart with sensitive technology. All of DRDO's tests have successful so far, with another in the pipeline..& doesn't India already posses the S-300?

it is the case everywhere. there is a difference between assumptions and working on the ground.

they have never claimed that. you are saying it.

well. both AAD and PAD have been tested. all 3 tests were successful.

ofc. but not this if our system is better.

may be. but even they are cutting costs.

that is why they are going for joint ventures with india.

the gap is not as big as you think it is. both have strengths and weaknesses. on the other hand russia is recovering and US is plummeting.

even patriot system is not fool proof. if we have our own system which has been proven, why go for it?

Click to expand...

It has been a policy of the GOI that before purchase of any major weapons system DRDO is aasked for their input whether the system can be developed in India or not. In majority of cases DRDO has always replied in the affermative.

Every weapons systems does have delays I agree to it but are we not stretching things too far dor DRDO.

Regarding choosing the system to be procured , the Defence Ministry will be in a better position to take a call.

However if all of the claims made by DRDO were taken at face value we would have had a world class home grown defence system by now. We would not be spending Billions on purchases from all over the world.

It has been a policy of the GOI that before purchase of any major weapons system DRDO is aasked for their input whether the system can be developed in India or not.

Click to expand...

so what is wrong in that?

In majority of cases DRDO has always replied in the affermative.

Click to expand...

then why are we procuring MRCA, SCORPENE etc..

Every weapons systems does have delays I agree to it but are we not stretching things too far dor DRDO.

Click to expand...

who has come up with prithvi, agni, akash, pinaka, nagan, brahmos etc...

Regarding choosing the system to be procured , the Defence Ministry will be in a better position to take a call.

Click to expand...

it is the armed wings who selects. MOD will approve with political gains in mind.

However if all of the claims made by DRDO were taken at face value we would have had a world class home grown defence system by now. We would not be spending Billions on purchases from all over the world.

there is more than meets the eye here i thik that we may be working on a THHAD like system with the PAD and ADM developed by DRDO we might be buying the PAC 3 for Tire II Defense system i think that the goverment might be trying for A National Net centric Automated Air defense enviorment

I don't see this deal going through. We've been lobbying for the Patriot air defense system (PAC-2) since 2005: when a team from DCSA gave MoD a highly-sensitive technical briefing on the system (and on combat airkraft). To date however, nothing is available in the public domain to suggest it was bought. Although I've recently discovered that India has quite a proclivity to procure systems on the sly, or sub rosa if you will. Something I thought didn't exist given the scale of media reporting and freedom on speculation and purchase.

I also want you to think about this possible purchase in light of the General Accounting Office's investigation of the Patriot Missile's performance during the Persian Gulf War. The investigation found that "only 9% of the missiles were effective"; the Defense Dept. then reduced its claims of effectiveness from "96% to 52%": Ofcourse, this investigation was performed in 1992, and the bearing it has on the "much improved" PAC-3 is debatable.

Here's the newbie guide to how the Patriot missile-defence system works, with a comparison made between the PAC-3 and the PAC-2:

The Patriot Missile

A Patriot missile is a single-stage solid rocket that currently comes in two forms. There is the older PAC-2 missile, which is larger and not as effective as the newer PAC-3 missile deployed in 2002.

​

The PAC-2 missile:

* is 17 feet long (5.2 meters)
* is 16 inches (41 cm) in diameter
* has fins that extend out another 16 inches (41 cm).
* weighs almost 2,000 pounds (900 kg)
* carries a 200-pound (90 kg) fragmentation bomb with a proximity fuse.
* flies at Mach 5 and is supersonic within a second after launch.

Four PAC-2 missiles fit on a launcher.

The idea is for the PAC-2 to fly straight toward the incoming missile and then explode at the point of nearest approach. The explosion will either destroy the incoming missile with the fragments from the fragmentation bomb, or knock the incoming missile off course so it misses the target.

The PAC-3 missile is the same length as the PAC-2 but weighs only a third as much at 686 pounds (312 kg). It is only 10 inches (25 cm) in diameter. The smaller size means that 16 PAC-3 missiles can fit on a launcher. The fragmentation warhead weighs only 160 pounds (73 kg) in the PAC-3.

The idea behind a PAC-3 is for the missile to actually hit the incoming target and explode so that the incoming missile is completely destroyed. This feature makes it more effective against chemical and biological warheads because they are destroyed well away from the target.

The biggest difference between the PAC-2 and the PAC-3, and the thing that allows the PAC-3 to actually hit its target, is the fact that the PAC-3 has its own built-in radar transmitter and guidance computer. The operational differences between the PAC-2 and PAC-3 are discussed later in the article.

PAC-3 missiles currently cost two to three million dollars each.

The Launcher and Other Systems

A Patriot missile battery can have up to 16 launchers. All of the launchers in the battery communicate with the single ECS van through either fiber optic cables or radio links. The ECS van sends commands to the launchers to fire the missiles.

​

Each launcher is about the size of a tractor-trailer rig. A launcher can hold four PAC-2 missiles or 16 PAC-3 missiles. After firing its missiles, a re-supply truck with a crane pulls up next to the launcher to load it with new missiles.

​

Each launcher has its own power supply to power the electronics and point the missiles, although a Patriot missile does not have to be aimed directly at the target when it launches.

Each Patriot missile battery has one high-power radar antenna that plays a variety of roles. The antenna can:

* Scan the skies looking for incoming targets.
* Detect a potential target.
* Determine the trajectory, speed and heading of the incoming target.
* Provide information to identify the target. Ideally, the radar provides enough information to determine whether the target is a friend or a foe.
* Track Patriot missiles once they are launched to help aim them at the target.
* Illuminate the target, which is important to the Track-via-Missile guidance system used by the PAC-2 missiles.

​

The traditional image of a radar antenna is the rotating, parabolic antenna seen on top of airport control towers and aircraft carriers. The Patriot system instead uses a phased array antenna. This antenna contains 5,000 phase-shifting elements that allow the antenna to send out multiple, narrow, precisely-aimed radar beams that scan the sky. With these beams, the Patriot's radar can track up to 100 potential targets as well as up to nine outbound Patriot missiles. The radar antenna has a 63 mile (100 kilometer) range. We'll look at the ECS van next.

The ECS van is the command center of the Patriot missile battery. The ECS contains stations for three operators as well as the computers that control the battery. The radar antenna and all of the launchers in the battery connect to the ECS, and Patriot missiles in flight also communicate with the ECS.

Inside the van there are two radar consoles. Operators can see the status of all of the targets that the system is currently tracking. Operators can let the system run in fully automatic mode, or they can intervene to select or deselect targets. There is also a communication station that allows the battery to communicate with other batteries or with the command center for the region.

​

Putting it All Together

A Patriot missile battery operates slightly differently depending on whether it is firing PAC-2 or PAC-3 missiles. We will look at the operation of the PAC-2 missile first since it is currently the more common missile deployed.

The radar antenna scans the sky looking for incoming targets. Once it finds a target, it scans it more intensely and communicates with the ECS. The goal of the scan is to determine the speed and heading of the target and also to identify it as a friend or a foe. When the operator or computer decides that it has an incoming foe, the ECS calculates an initial heading for the Patriot missile. It chooses the Patriot missile it will launch, downloads the initial guidance information to that missile and launches it.

​

Within three seconds the missile is traveling at Mach 5 and is headed in the general direction of the target. The radar antenna on the ground has three roles at this point.

* It continues to track the incoming missile.
* It acquires and tracks the outbound Patriot missile to provide the ECS with information on its heading and speed.
* It illuminates the incoming target.

The illumination signal reflects off the target and is received by an antenna in the nose of the PAC-2 missile that is heading its way. The PAC-2 missile then relays this signal back to the ECS. The ECS uses the illumination signal information along with the radar's information on the track of the incoming target and outbound Patriot to steer the Patriot missile. The ECS sends guidance commands to the Patriot missile to adjust its course. When the Patriot missile is at the point of closest approach to the target, its fragmentation bomb explodes.

Unlike the PAC-2, the PAC-3 missile contains its own radar transmitter and computer, allowing it to guide itself. Once launched, it turns on its radar, finds the target and aims for a direct hit. This has been compared to hitting a bullet with a bullet. The difference is that both the incoming target missile and the outbound Patriot missile are traveling up to five times faster than a typical bullet and are closing in on one another at up to Mach 10, or two miles per second. At that speed there is no room for error -- if the missile miscalculates by even 1/100th of a second, it will be off by more than 100 feet (30.5 meters).

​

Like the Stinger missile and the Sidewinder missile, the Patriot is a guided missile. However, the Patriot is somewhat more sophisticated. In both the Stinger and Sidewinder missiles, the infrared seeker is sensitive to engine heat. A human being is responsible for finding and identifying the target, appropriately aiming the missile so that the its heat-seeking eye can lock onto the target, and then firing the missile.

A Patriot missile, instead, depends on radar. The Patriot missile system uses its ground-based radar to find, identify and track the targets. An incoming missile could be 50 miles (80.5 kilometers) away when the Patriot's radar locks onto it. At that distance, the incoming missile would not even be visible to a human being, much less identifiable. It is even possible for the Patriot missile system to operate in a completely automatic mode with no human intervention at all. An incoming missile flying at Mach 5 is traveling approximately one mile every second. There just isn't a lot of time to react and respond once the missile is detected, making automatic detection and launching an important feature.

While the Stinger is a shoulder-launched weapon and the Sidewinder launches from aircraft, Patriot missiles are launched from Patriot missile batteries based on the ground. A typical battery has five components:

* The missiles themselves (MIM-104)
* The missile launcher, which holds, transports, aims and launches the missiles (M-901). This part is necessary because each missile weighs almost 1 ton.
* A radar antenna (MPQ-53 or MPQ-65) to detect incoming missiles.
* An equipment van known as the Engagement Control Station (ECS) houses computers and consoles to control the battery. (MSQ-104)
* A power plant truck equipped with two 150-kilowatt generators that provide power for the radar antenna and the ECS.

​

Since a Patriot missile battery can have up to 16 launchers, and there are also spare missiles to re-supply the launchers as missiles are fired, you can see that deploying a Patriot missile battery is not a small endeavor. Each launcher is roughly the size of a tractor-trailer rig, as is the ECS and the power supply truck. There are also operating personnel, technicians, support personnel, fuel for the generators, security forces to protect the battery, etc. This article describes a "convoy of about 300 vehicles, which included infantry forces, tanks and Marines" to move a Patriot missile battery to the front lines and make it operational. The deployment of Patriot missiles is not a decision made lightly.